ArticleModern pathology : an official journal of the United States and Canadian Academy of Pathology, Inc2020
The impact of 2018 ASCO-CAP HER2 testing guidelines on breast cancer HER2 results. An audit of 2132 consecutive cases evaluated by immunohistochemistry and in situ hybridization.
Article in Modern pathology : an official journal of the United States and Canadian Academy of Pathology, Inc, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Improving HER2 Diagnostics with Digital Real-Time PCR for Ultrafast, Precise Prediction of Anti-HER2 Therapy Response in Patients with Breast Cancer.Small methods · 2026Article
- Association between tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes and oncotype DX estrogen receptor, progesterone receptor, and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 single gene scores in hormone receptor-positive/HER2-negative breast cancer.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- HER2 copy number determination in breast cancer using the highly sensitive droplet digital PCR method.Virchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology · 2024Article
- Digital PCR quantification of ultrahigh ERBB2 copy number identifies poor breast cancer survival after trastuzumab.NPJ breast cancer · 2024Article
- Comprehensive prognostic prediction of metastatic breast cancer treated with eribulin using blood‑based parameters and ratio.Molecular and clinical oncology · 2024Article
- Tumor budding and fibrotic focus-proposed grading system for tumor budding in invasive carcinoma no special type of the breast.Virchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology · 2022Article
- Circulating tumor cell assay to non-invasively evaluate PD-L1 and other therapeutic targets in multiple cancers.PloS one · 2022Article
- The concordance between IHC and ISH for HER-2 testing in breast cancer in Nakhon Pathom Hospital, Thailand, based on the ASCO/CAP 2018 guidelines: a retrospective study.Ecancermedicalscience · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The 2018 iteration of the ASCO-CAP HER2 testing guidelines proposes significant changes with an emphasis on the integration of concurrent immunohistochemistry (IHC) and in situ hybridization (ISH). We wished to evaluate the impact of these changes on clinical practice. Between Jan 2012 to Feb 2017, 2132 consecutive invasive breast carcinomas were evaluated with IHC and ISH for HER2. The sample tested was the breast primary or axillary nodes in all but 57 (2.7%) distant metastases. For 1824 cases with both dual-probe ISH and IHC results, the ISH subgroup was 1: 299 (16.4%), 2: 19 (1.0%), 1.0%, 3: 6 (0.3%), 4: 48 (2.6%) and 5: 1452 (79.6%). Ultimately 21% of group 2 and 4 cases and 80% of group 4 cases were positive. The change in HER2 status between the 2018 vs 2013 was: amplified in 323 (15.2%) vs 15.5%; not amplified in 1804 (84.6%) vs 82.2%; equivocal in 0 vs 2.3% previously. In 22 of 2127 cases (1.03%) the 2013 and 2018 results were discordant, all in groups 2-4. The discrepant cases included 15 of 331 (4.5%) of 2013 amplified cancers, now negative (all in groups 2 or 3) and 7 of 1796 (0.4%) 2013 nonamplified cases, now positive (all in group 4). Because of routine testing with both IHC and ISH, we found 6 of 1147 (0.52%) IHC negative (0 or 1+) cases were amplified by ISH. Further, 19 of 289 (6.6%) of IHC 3+ cases were nonamplified by ISH, circumstances not covered by these guidelines. In summary at the population level, the 2018 ASCO-CAP guidelines have a 99% agreement with the 2013 results. A major advantage is the abolishment of the clinically problematic equivocal category. Routine performance of both IHC and ISH uncovers a small proportion of cancers whose HER2 status is not addressed by these guidelines.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.